This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: c++/5282: .so exception handler works in 3.0.2 not 3.0.3
- From: Mark Swanson <swansma at yahoo dot com>
- To: rodrigc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org,nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 09:19:19 -0500
- Subject: Re: c++/5282: .so exception handler works in 3.0.2 not 3.0.3
- Organization: personal
- References: <20020105045339.17792.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
On January 4, 2002 11:53 pm, rodrigc@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
> Synopsis: .so exception handler works in 3.0.2 not 3.0.3
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
> State-Changed-By: rodrigc
> State-Changed-When: Fri Jan 4 20:53:38 2002
> State-Changed-Why:
> You did not provide enough files to compile your testcase:
> tuxmodule.h:31:17: tux.h: No such file or directory
>
> Instead of feeding us files one by one, read the
> bug submission instructions at:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html and give us a single preprocessed
> source file.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&;
>pr=5282
The update I sent (BugLib.cpp) does not require tuxmodule.h at all. My hope
was that would be enough to meet the requirements. It's three tiny files
instead of one, but they don't require any third party package...
Because of the nature of the test case requiring the creation of a shared
library, and a test program to load it, that would require two preprocessed
files. Would that be preferrable than my three tiny source files?
Lemme know.
Thanks.